The Waco daily examiner. [volume] (Waco, Tex.) 187?-1888, 1887-06-14

death th"ir budding hDpcs.
Now, one of ;he arguments against
prohibition in practice l., that the
amp,ations to evasion and the lives
held out TO iniormers will. in their
natural consequence, debauch the
consci ,nccs Of tho weak into hypoc-
risy and falsiiying, a1d turn loose
upon every neighborho)d u legion OF
domiciliary spies. the Suggestion
that the legislature can place no re
-trictiou upon the right OF the owner
Of vineyard to manufacture an
the wine he may wan,
irrAisoEn consumption, assumes .u
advance that TINT body will -tultit.
or, what j. worse, deliberately for.
-wcar itself. Wlllauymln, lawyer or
iaymau, .ookiug to the plain, and I'm.
ambiguous and mandatory words Of
The amendment, dare sny that il docs
Enthusiastically contemplate the abs.
lutte Inhibition otthe -lio, manufacture.
aud exchange Of a.l Intoxicating iiG
uor- -lvirg and excepting :OrtI-
purpose therein named "For At-
own consumption" i- - use which %,
broadnc-, Of construction Will justly
pmcing under the head of "mcdical
mechanical, governmental, aud ,cicut-
tic purposes"
But it is said that after the amend.
mchi is given effect by the Legislative
power the question n TO what liquors
arc iutoNicants will be- one of fact
for the iurio- to pass upon in each in.
dividua. case o it arises In a sense
this $50; but the deadly sting of til,
proposition is, thai If .sole of circum-
vcntion aud evasion, i'm that it put,
the law itself UPON trial in every case
where it is infractel. 10 plead that
wine is not an lntoXicant, void be ~
special a. the defense set up In the ia.
nous kcntdcky case, that "o,d slcdge'
was not'a game 3D.. chanct, but one OF
xiii nj of very Great skill az thai
The reported ca.cs of the Ia
trmrch Noau, snd Alexander the
Grca', oughtto place the doctrine that
wine is an ntoXiclut upon the sole
foundation of res oliudicQta. AL
such argument is nn invitation to
first vote for the amendment, for
cou'cicuc, sake, and then take the
chances ot defeating is application
afterwards to cases whore the citizen
ON rial happens to belong 70 cA,,
which the propounders of the argu.
mcnt dD not now and never did mean
it to restrain. This give meanGg
md significance to certain inadver-
tent expressions not infrequently
heard from those high in the council,
of the prohibition movement, such n.
''l shall vote tor prohibition, but |
would not il | thought it would
prohibit me- 1t would seem. then,
that practical prohibition is worse
than anti-prohbitioniots have ever
Claimed it 10 be in tha, it makes hyp-
ocritcs in advance and by anticipate,
ry relation. Anti-prohibitoni,t, do
not assent To any such construction
OF the amendment. They deny, in
advance, for the representative,
whom the people shall choose to give
the amendment effect, in the event of
ITS adoption, that they will be so
Of their oaths of Office AS
to attempt to render nugatory. or to
ialtcr IN double scnsc, with pro-
vision that will then be- firmly i'm
beddcd In the organic law.
They believe the doctrine of
the amendment is bad ia
theory and worse in practice; and
further, they claim OH The record that
it is impossible OF enforcement. But
they are incapable OF the duplicity of
setting up prohibition with one hand
aud throttling 1t with the other; aud.
above oil else, they will, in the event
OF ia adoption, give it honest elect
until such time rs they eau work its
eNpurgation from tie organic law bv
u powcr AS sovereign and august As
mat which placed ii there. Finally.
they submit that If anything were